JLS

This is an interesting suggestion and I'll try it out ! I might see if I've got a corroded common bun penny in my junk box to practice with first, not keen to damage the F21 at all given the number of specimens around.

Thanks, Pm'd.

Feel a bit cautious regarding balsamic vinegar - would it not strip the obverse patina ? I'm used to using olive oil but from my experience it won't totally eliminate the verdigris on a coin like this, without keeping it in so long that it changes the color of the coin.

Nice, thanks for the confirmation ! Now I just have the dilemma of whether to try to remove the gunk from the reverse or not... @secret santa, you're welcome to add these photos to the rare pennies site if F21 makes the cut, so to speak.

I bought this thinking it was a F18 (and probably overpaid in that case), but is this actually a F21 with the bust so close to the outer border ?

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Edward-VII-Penny-1902-Low-Tide-Variety/202980311518 A "scarce higher grade example"

In practice I've never seen a forgery of one of those either, difficult with the corrosion and the copper plug, no-one sane would buy a unprovenanced "clean" example. I'd guess it would be much easier to make a quality forgery of e.g. an 18th century American cent or English civil war siege pieces, which in practice are issues you have to be careful with.

If you have a look at Peck (English Copper, Tin and Bronze Coins in the British Museum) you will see weight ranges provided. Coins outside these ranges are typically treated as mint errors, and can be worth a premium, especially for William III copper. The only reign you typically get good quality forgeries for is Anne, and most of these are either casts or electrotypes, so either look rough and porous, or have a seam/filing on the edge. I've never seen a good quality forgery of a Charles II or George I bronze; it would be very difficult to emulate the poor quality surfaces, strike and slightly irregular blanks well, and not really worth the effort given the low prices these coins achieve in top grade - there are better targets for the forger.

Yes, you're right, it's part of the "first series" along with the Kettle issues etc. I don't know if it would have actually been struck in 1788 or a few years after, but it definitely is Georgian rather than Victorian.

Not so sure about that as I've seen several "idealized" pictures of the workhouse corresponding just to the buildings on 1812 tokens from far later...by the Victorian period the complex was enormous. I may have a bit more of a research.

Yes, this is a relatively early imitation spade guinea and fairly rare; listed by Neilson as number 2960. I wouldn't rate the value much in that grade as you do get nice ones with original gilding occasionally, but it's not an easy piece to find.

Hello all ! Recently acquired this piece. Wondering if anyone recognizes the countermark ? I suspect it was just a jewelry die test or something but a connection with St. Kitts could be mooted ! The countermark is pretty heavily worn which is unusual for coin jewelry in my experience...

If there is some better material among the 2000 pieces you could see if DNW were interested (perhaps split up by geographical period etc.), the fees will take a bite but they can achieve really good results with even mediocre bulk lots in my experience. George Jones in London normally buys bulk lots of coins of pretty much any quality for reasonable prices, although I doubt he's doing much business given COVID19, I can see if I have his business card somewhere if you want.

This is a 19th or 20th century button from Christ's Hospital School - obverse shows king Edward VI - I can read "RD VI" on the top left. Here's one of more recent vintage with the same design: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/164038578971

Very nice ! Interesting to see the contemporary context of the Workhouse on the street (vs. how it's portrayed on the workhouse's own 19th century tokens) - assuming the two buildings either side of it are not part of the enlargement...

Just picked up some bun pieces to have a go at learning to attribute varieties on these. I think this 1861 piece is 6 + G (Freeman 277) due to the incuse veins on the leaves + the spacing of the inner circle - confirmation or correction would be most appreciated !

No-one knows what the long term economic impact of COVID19 is likely to be. I agree that the bottom of the coin market is likely to be hit, but I think this is the confirmation of a long term trend. There are fewer collectors of lower quality material, and the internet makes it hard to sell very common coins profitably (or at all !), because there's far more supply than demand. Just compare the Spink prices for common George VI and Elizabeth II predecimal issues to the market reality...it's impossible to sell most of these pieces in unc. for more than a few pounds each in my experience.

The thing about coins which have been "buffed" with a cloth rather than abrasively cleaned is that it's very difficult to tell that it's happened once the coin has toned down enough. And almost all coins above a certain age have had such treatment at some point unless they've come out of the ground more recently. But the florin in question has really quite obvious hairlines in the obverse field - you have to give a coin more than a gentle rub with a cloth to get that effect. It's still an attractive piece but it's not ever going to be as nice as it was before it was cleaned.

My guess would be that there's something else going on with the dies, a bit like the broken bead on the recessed ear pennies. Perhaps there were five subtly different dies which they numbered up accordingly, to allow them and the coins produced to be distinguished at a glance. They made a small number of coins from each (maybe double figures ?), deemed the results unsatisfactory, and for some reason the coins were added to the mint output rather than melted down. If this was the case, I doubt it will ever be confirmed, given the poor state of the surviving examples.

Maurice Bull's "English Silver Coinage" is also more detailed on varieties than Spink and provides rarity ratings for everything, of variable accuracy. Also covers the pattern silver coinage for Victoria in reasonable detail, if that's of any interest.

Despite being an obvious fake, it looked silver in hand surprisingly so I acid tested it and ended up selling it as scrap with a load of dateless Victorian threepences....hopefully no-one fished it out before it reached the furnace and the neophytes are safe !

Last time I bought a fake coin by accident on eBay and the seller was un-cooperative, I just escalated through eBay and I ended up getting a full refund without even returning the fake...

Can definitely see Jagger there.

On this topic my least favorite seller of fake coins on eBay right now is Pana_nis: sells pretty poor fakes of Anglo-Saxon coinage for enough money to actually buy an original (of a less rare type obviously): https://www.ebay.couk/itm/ALFRED-the-GREAT-871-899-AD-KING-of-WESSEX-ANGLO-SAXON-SILVER-Ar-PENNY-1-25-gr/143513529018?hash=item216a12aaba:g:FbcAAOSw9rVeLZPA His negative feedback is pretty funny for what it's worth, with the obscene ranting in transliterated Serbian ! https://www.ebay.co.uk/fdbk/feedback_profile/pana_nis?filter=feedback_page:RECEIVED_AS_SELLER&_trksid=p2047675.l2560

Straight from the United Cingdom too